Why would you want to find dynamism?
I think it’s because too many of our institutions and leaders pride themselves on stopping change or returning things to how they used to be.
Longtime readers of this little missive will remember my sarcasm at seeing our city councilor of 20+ years finally being voted out. His campaign was a long list of the new businesses and buildings he’s tried to oppose (Whole Foods is here) and succeeded in opposing (there’s no gymnastics center in our town).
Dynamism, says the word explainers, is:
the quality of being characterized by vigorous activity and progress
It’s the opposite of NIMBY and reactionary politics and stupid fights to make the legendary ‘80s or '60s or '50s reappear. If things were really dynamic, the most beautiful and valuable neighborhoods wouldn’t be the kind we no longer are allowed to make.
Dynamism is hard.
It could be that we’re complacent. Or maybe it’s that we lack imagination. Or maybe it’s that we have other values, like safety or tradition, which make it difficult to innovate where it matters. (In my view, electronic and internet innovation isn’t a great example of dynamism: it’s new ideas where none were before, not the trying of new ideas in place of the old.)
And so this week I have three readings on this theme. First, a look at why old houses and neighborhoods are nicer. Second, a look at the forces that make it incredibly hard to innovate in our neighborhoods. And third, since baseball season is long over, is a look at just how tough it is to change baseball’s course.
The readings make it clear: activity and progress are difficult to do, and even more difficult to get right. Even so, I’d like to think it’s worth it.
